3.6 |
Development of UK strategy and options, November 2002 to January
2003
155.
Mr Straw
also posed and then answered four “key questions” which arose
from
the resolution:
•
What
constituted a material breach?
•
Who would
decide what happened if there was a material breach?
•
Whether
there would be a second Security Council resolution if military
action
proved
necessary?
•
Whether, if
military action was necessary, the House of Commons would be
able
to vote on
it and, if so, when?
156.
Addressing
what would constitute a material breach, Mr Straw referred to
operative
paragraph 4
of the resolution, but went on to say:
“As with
any definition of that type, it is never possible to give an
exhaustive list of all
the
conceivable behaviours that it covers. That judgement has to be
made against
the real
circumstances that arise, but I reassure the House that material
breach
means
something significant: some behaviour or pattern of behaviour that
is serious.
Among such
breaches could be action by the Government of Iraq seriously
to
obstruct or
impede the inspectors, to intimidate witnesses, or a pattern of
behaviour
where any
single action appears relatively minor but the actions as a whole
add up
to
something deliberate and more significant: something that shows
Iraq’s intention
not to
comply.”
157.
Mr Straw
also stated that the resolution made clear that there were two
parts
to a material
breach, “a failure of disclosure and other failure to
comply”.
158.
Addressing who
would decide what happened if there was a material
breach,
Mr Straw
stated that if there were “any further material breach”, it would
be reported
to the
Security Council “for assessment” and the Council would convene
immediately
to
“consider the situation and the need for full compliance with all
the relevant …
resolutions
in order to secure international peace and security”.
“If there
is evidence of a false statement or omission, together with a
failure to
comply in
other respects, it can be reported to the Security Council as a
further
material
breach either by a Security Council member or by the
inspectors.
The Council
will undoubtedly require the opinion of the inspectors,
regardless
of who makes
the final report.
“There is
then a clear requirement for an immediate meeting of the Security
Council
to make the
assessment … Where the breach is flagrant – say, a physical
and
serious
attack on the inspectors the decision on whether there had been a
material
breach will
effectively have been made by the Iraqis … there will be no
decision to
be made.
The Security Council will undoubtedly then act …”
31